Download new theory of non-expanding universe

1
NEW THEORY OF NON-EXPANDING UNIVERSE
(The 1990. '97 & '98 text revised in 2001. See Chapter-11 of the NewBookOnUPT on the
website, namely, "Realistic Foundations of Physics & Cosmology"/ (The Beginning of
Realistic Science)
Herein we will review the conceptual foundations of the theories of expanding universe, reexplain the cosmological red shift from the sharmon medium to develop a new theory of nonexpanding universe.
1. Cosmological red shift
Astronomer Edwin P. Hubble was the first to observe that the spectral lines in the light from
distant galaxies are shifted towards the red end of the visible spectrum with an increment of
their wavelength. If  is the original unaffected wavelength and   ( > ) of the same spectral
line in the light from the galaxy as received by an observer on earth, the red shift is given by
Z = (  -  )/ .... (1)
Hubble attributed this red shift to the Doppler effect due to recession of galaxies. But in
UPT's non-expanding universe it is caused by the depletion of spectral photon energy during
passage through the sharmon medium.
2. Optical Doppler effect
The relative motion between the observer and the source of
light causes an apparent change in the wavelength, called "Doppler Effect". But the phase
remains invariant to Lorentz transformations. That is
2 c/  (t - x /c) = 2 c/ (t - x/c).
Here t = (t + vx/c2)/(1 - v2/c2)1/2 , c being the velocity of light and v that of the source
receding away from the observer. Thence we get,
  =  (1 + v/c)/(1 - v2/c2)1/2. .... (2)
The expansion of (2) gives
  =  (1 + v/c + ½ v2/c2 + ½ v3/c3 + ...).
This on first approximation yields
  =  (1 + v/c).
The Doppler red shift for v < c is then given by
Z = (  -  )/ = v/c. .... (3)
When v~c, eqn. (2) leads to
Z = (  -  )/ = [( 1 + v/c) / (1 - v2/c2)1/2 - 1 ] .... (3a)
3 Hubble's law
Edwin S. Hubble had observed that "fainter (more distant) the stellar source the more redshifted light (of lower frequency and higher wavelength) it emits" or the cosmological red
shift Z increases directly with the distance D of the light emitting galaxy. That is,
Z = ((  -  )/ )  D.
2
This with eqn (3) leads to the Hubble law
V = HD .... (11.4)
wherein V is the velocity of receding galaxy. The Hubble constant H is a measure of the rate
of expansion of the universe V/D.
The numerical value of H comes to 1.8x10-4 when D is measured in light years and V in
kilometers per second [1]. However, there is no general agreement on the precise value of H,
which therefore is controversial. In UPT, the Hubble constant loses its meaning and
significance since there is no recession of galaxies in the nonexpanding universe, hence no
Hubble’s law/constant.
The redshift Z can be used to estimate the distance of the light source D=Zc/H in expanding
universe. For the non-expanding universe, however, D = Z/K , vide sec. 5.1 below.
4. Theories of Expanding Universe
4.1 The Big Bang Theory
Abbe Georges Edouard Lemaitre during 1920s developed the hypothesis that the
interpretation of the cosmological red shift as optical Doppler effect suggests an expanding
universe, which began with a violent explosion or a "Big Bang" of the extremely dense and
intensely hot substance. These ideas were further developed in 1940s by George Gamow [1].
He estimated the age of rocks, oceans, moon, sun, stars, Milky Way, etc. and always got
nearly the same value: "a few billion (109) years"! He therefrom suggested that the initial Big
Bang occurred a few billion years ago and the various features of the "Expanding Universe"
have since developed through evolutionary processes.
4.2 Cosmological Horizon
In the expanding universe the intergalactic distances increase continuously like the
separations among dots placed over the 2-D surface of an inflating rubber bladder. As a result
the receding velocities of galaxies increase in proportion to the distance from the observer
situated on any one of them. It can be shown from the Hubble's law, eqn. (4) that the galaxies
distant 2x109 light years away recede with a velocity of light c. This marks the Cosmological
Horizon. Since the galaxies beyond it cannot be observed as the signals from them to reach us
have to move faster than light which is prohibited by Relativity Theories.
4.3 The Steady State Universe
According to Hubble's law, every receding galaxy moves increasingly faster as it goes farther
away. When it crosses the cosmological horizon it would disappear since no signal from it can
ever reach us. So the observable universe would eventually end up as an empty space. The
time for this to happen is about 1010 years, which is only about a fifth of the sun's remaining
life. To save this unpalatable situation the Theory of Steady State Universe [2, 3] has been
proposed. This is based on the Perfect Cosmological Principle (PCP) which [3] admits no
preferred or singular position, direction, or epoch. The universe looks the same in all
directions and at all positions steadily with time. It has been in the past and will in future
remain the same all round as it is now. It did not have a big bang like singular beginning and
will not have a singular end.
However, the Steady State Theory, like Big Bang Theory, assumes an Expanding Universe in
which the receding galaxies will disappear beyond the Cosmological Horizon in about 1010
years. But the scenario will remain the same unchanged due to continuous creation of matter
all over. New galaxies will be created out of the background material just at the rate required
to compensate for the disappearing ones.
3
Some authors [4, 5], have disproved the Big Bang model without establishing the Steady
State version. This has created a sort of conceptual vacuum, which we herein propose to fill
with a new Theory of Nonexpanding Universe [6].
4.4 Initial creation of matter
No cosmological theory can avoid a serious discussion of this basic issue. Gamow's
estimations yielded similar ages of a few billion years for atoms, rocks, oceans, stars, galaxies
etc., suggesting that the matter in the universe is perhaps not infinitely old. This also points to
the period of occurrence of some major reorganization related to the initial creation of matter
in the universe.
The Big Bang theory envisages creation of the entire matter in the whole of universe in a
single "big bang" which also created the 3-D space that has since been expanding
exponentially with time. But also see secs. 5.3 & 5.3.1, below.
According to the Steady State model, there is a continuous creation of matter all round which
keeps the cosmological scenario "steady" by compensating for the continuously disappearing
galaxies beyond the cosmological horizon 2x109 light years away. This requires the mean
density of the background material (of unclear nature) to be maintained constant at about
3x10-31 gm/cm3 through creation of matter [7] at a rate of about 1.5x10-48 gm/cm3/sec. That is,
of one new hydrogen atom per gallon of expanding space once in every 250 million (or
2.5x108) years [2, 7].
Magnitudewise, this is not a big scale of creation but conceptually it is highly infirm. To the
most vital question: "Where does the newly created matter come from?" Hoyle [2] replies: "It
does not come from any where. Material simply appears - it is created. At one time the atoms
composing the material do not exist, and at a later time they do. This may seem a very strange
idea, and I agree that it is. But in science it does not matter how strange an idea may seem so
long as it works, that is to say, so long as the idea can be expressed in a precise (implying
mathematical) form, and so long as its consequences are found in agreement with
observations. ..."
The UPT does not endorse this kind of unrealistic logic. In the Copenhagen Interpretation (sec
8.4 of the book), the Quantum Theory was similarly declared as a "complete theory" because
it works, although it does not explain the wave-quantum unity in radiation and moving
material particles which it was all about. Violations of the inviolable laws of the conservation
of energy and momentum were allowed by Heisenberg relations (8.1) and (8.2) because these
are expressed in a precise mathematical form. The same Heisenberg relations now validate
Steady State Theory's creations of matter out of nothing. But mathematics is only a language,
though a very precise and exact one. It can and does supplement the description, but can never
supplant the basic features of the objective reality. To say "material simply appears" is NOT
science. Even metaphysics feels and meets the need of rationality by invoking the creative
substance and creating agency viz. Him, to rationalize the initial creation of matter in the
universe. This idea of the creation of matter out of nothing has weaker logic than even
metaphysics.
But this weakness of logic applies also to the Big Bang Theory [1]. That is why Hoyle [2]
continues: "Some people have argued that continuous creation introduces a new assumption
in science - and a very startling assumption at that. Now I do not agree. It only replaces a
hypothesis that lies concealed in the assumption that the whole of the matter in the universe
was created in one big bang at a particular time in the remote past. On scientific grounds, this
big bang assumption is much the less palatable of the two. For it is an irrational process that
cannot be described in scientific terms. Continuous creation on the other hand can be
represented by precise (mathematical) equations whose consequences can be worked out and
compared with observations. ..." This strange justification for the "strange" creation of matter
from nothing gives a new unscientific definition of science. Stranger still is the absence of any
4
worthwhile dissent from the scientific community, which seems to have willy-nilly
acquiesced in to the invocation of the mathematics’ misleading halo of exactitude.
But UPT's argument remains that "creation of matter from nothing" is irrational and
unrealistic whether it is a continuous process or one time single event. Kapp’s hypothesis of
the Symmetrical Impermanence of Matter [8] invokes and implies both, creation of matter
from, and disappearance into, "nothing". It also therefore is implausible, unrealistic and
unsatisfactory. But UPT's basic cosmic substance, in contrast, is eternally conserved and
preserved, vide sec 5.4 below.
5. Theory of Non-expanding Universe
5.1 Cosmological red shift recomputed
According to the new theory of Non-expanding Universe [6] the cosmological red shifts are
caused by the combined non-Doppler effects of gravitational, electromagnetic (resistive plus
inductive) and viscous losses. These deplete the energy E = h of the sharmon-composed
spectral light photon by  E = h.  , thereby shifting the wavelength  = c/ by   towards
red end of the spectrum. The red shift is given by
Z = +  / = -  / =  . E/hc.
First, if the light from a galaxy distant D passes through distances D1, D2, D3, ..., Dn of n
regions with +ve or -ve gravitational accelerations g1, g2, g3, ..., Dn the gravitational depletion
from the spectral energy quantum will be  E = (hn/c2) gnDn. Therefore, the gravitational
red shift
Zg =  gn Dn /c2 = Kg D.
Due to uncertainties of D's and g's the quantization of the constant Kg is not easy and straight
forward. But since most of regions with +g and -g are crossed alternately on the way, net Kg is
negligibly small. Finally, if U1 is the gravitational potential around the distant source and U2
for the observer on earth, the resultant red or violet shift would be  (U2 - U1)/c2.
Secondly, since propagation of e.m. wave in the sharmon medium involves real displacement
currents, the resistive as well as inductive (electric & magnetic ) losses occur proportional to
D. The resultant e.m. red shift becomes
Zem = KemD.
But these too are insignificant losses because the electrical resistance of the sharmon medium
is extremely high. Therefore, Kem like Kg is also very small.
Thirdly and most importantly, according to Stoke's law the sharmon aggregate of spectral
energy quantum h of spherical radius r, in traveling a distance D through the sharmon
medium of viscosity  (sec 4.6 of the book) suffers a viscous loss  E = 6 r Dc. It produces
a viscous red shift
Zv = 6 r  D  / h = Kv D.
Here the energy loss is reflected in the increase of wavelength  because the velocity c of the
photon remains unaffected. But, for the motion of a large material body in a viscous fluid the
velocity decreases to mark the loss of its kinetic energy ½ mv2.
As an example, for the sodium yellow light  = 5890x10-8 cm, the h quantum has ns =
3.6146x1014 sharmons or nc = 2ns cosminos each having a radius rc = 0.8078x10-33 cm.
Taking the photon as a sphere of closely packed cosminos its radius becomes r = rc . nc1/3 =
7.24x10-29 cm. With  = 0.65x10-22 dyne.sec/cm2 (sec 4.6),
5
Kv = 0.8344672x10-27 cgs units.
In the theories of expanding universe, the Doppler red shift Z = V/c and Hubble's law V = HD
connect the receding velocity V of the galaxy with its red shift Z and distance D. This gives
the constant cKv (= H) = 1.84782x10-17 cgs units or 60.13 Km/s/ Mps in UPT. It can be
compared with the Hubble constant H = 1.9145x10-17 cgs units or 62.3 Km/s/Mps for Big
Bang theory given by Gamow and 58 - 73 Km/s/Mps as recently observed [9]. Although H
loses its original meaning and significance in the new Theory of Non-expanding Universe
since there is now no receding velocity of the galaxy V for the Hubble's law V = HD.
Computation of the viscosity of the sharmon medium in sec 4.6 has an element of
arbitrariness. This apparent weakness is also a veiled strength because of the implied
variability of the theoretical viscosity to fit any observed value of H or Kv.
If the distance D consists of n sections D1 , D2 , ... , Dn having viscosity  1 ,  2 , ...,  n , then
Zv = 6 r c / h   n Dn .
The intervening cosmological dust can affect Kv and Zv by affecting  . Likewise, when a
supernova explodes a burst of sharmons is showered into its ambient environment, which
raises the viscosity  and the constant Kv of the light-propagating medium in its surroundings.
The resultant rise in the observed redshift Z leads to overestimation of the source-distance D
( Z) and of the expansion rate of the universe V/D=H ( Z). But these rises in the c Kv = H
etc. are local effects and do not signify any generalized property of the whole universe
permeating space, vide sec. 5.3 below.
The total non-Doppler red shift in the non-expanding universe is Z = KD where the total
K = Kg + Kem + Kv
of which Kv, for the viscous loss, is the most prominent. To these can be added the Doppler
red or violet shift ZD =  V/c, due for example to local gravitational effects from surrounding
galaxies.
The kinetic sharmon medium exerts an attractive gravitational effect as well as a repulsive
mechanical pressure on all bodies, though both are negligibly small.
5.2 The Horizon problem
In the theories of expanding universe, the recession velocity of a galaxy increases with the
distance. This gives rise to the concept of a "horizon" some 2x109 light years away, beyond
which galaxies appear to disappear because a signal from them to reach the observer, has to
move faster than light, which is prohibited by Relativity. In the non-expanding universe, both
the horizon and the horizon problem disappear since now there are no receding velocities for
galaxies. Our this brief presentation applies to both the particle and event types of horizons
since both are based on the superphotic (>c) receding velocities of galaxies and the UPT’s
non-expanding universe has no receding galaxies.
5.3 The Crucial test
To test whether the universe is actually expanding, red shifts of individual galaxies need to be
monitored. In the theories of expanding universe the redshift is Z=V/c and Hubble’s law
HD=V = dD/dt, giving Z/Zo = exp(Ht), Zo being starting value. So the redshift Z increases
exponentially with time. But for a non-expanding universe Z= KD, D being constant, redshift
Z does not change with time.
That is, the inter-galactic distances, the receding velocities of galaxies and the cosmological
red shifts should all increase exponentially with time if the universe is expanding according to
the Big Bang or Steady State theory, but should remain unchanged in the non-expanding
universe of UPT. However, since c =  , the spectral shift = (+  )/ = (-  )/ . In other
words, the increase in wavelength will be found more marked for long wavelengths (red and
infrared) and fall in frequency at high frequencies (violet, X-rays).
6
Since the individual red shifts have never been found to increase with time, the galaxies are
not flying away to generate an expansion of the universe. The observations [10] of ‘higher
than expected Hubble constants’ signify only local effects in the surrounding light medium
due to bursts of sharmon showers from the exploding stars and NO general property of the
whole universe permeating space is implied.
5.3.1 Observations on Type Ia supernovae
For an expanding universe, the rate of expansion is given by the Hubble constant H or the
ratio V/D of recession velocities-to-distances for the receding galaxies, V = Zc being
estimated by the redshift Z and the distance D by the apparent intensity or faintness of the
stellar source. The attractive gravitational force varies inversely as the square of the distance
and curves the spacetime continuum. In the relativistic Big Bang theory as developed by
Friedmann, Einstein, De Sitter & Gamow [1], the expansion rate of the universe due to
gravitational force should gradually slow down over time and stop eventually at infinite time.
But the Einstein’s cosmological constant  stands for a repulsive antigravity force un-curving
the spacetime and varying in proportion to the distance. This universal repulsive force, whose
physical nature is incomprehensible, tends to increase the expansion rate of the universe.
The observations [10] on some distant (old) type Ia supernovae as compared to those on
nearby (young) ones have been made. These suggest that the expansion rate, during the past
few billion years, has not only slowed down too little for the gravity to ever bring it to a stop
but something is nudging the expansion along. It is evidence for a cosmological constant and
for a universal repulsive force permeating space. It is a "horrible" indication because, as a
consequence of the continued expansion the universe would/ should gradually become more
and more tenuous with time to eventually end up as an empty space.
For UPT ’s new theory of non-expanding universe, as in these observations [10], the Kconstant and hence the redshift does not or need not gradually decrease to become zero at
infinite time. It may however vary (decrease or even increase) if, where and when the
causative factors (viscous, gravitational, e.m. or Doppler) vary to get reflected in the observed
local, regional, directional, or temporal variations, vide sec.5.1 above.
So, these observations, which tend to precipitate a sort of conceptual crisis for or give a fatal
blow to the relativistic Big Bang theory [1] because of the incomprehensible nature of the
antigravity force, are quite consistent with and natural expectations for the theory of nonexpanding universe. There is no antigravity force in existence or any likelihood for the
universe becoming empty or collapsing ever in future. The ad hoc and arbitrary nature of the
cosmological constant  make the relativistic Big Bang theory weak. Einstein himself was so
unhappy that at one stage he regarded the introduction of  as a blunder of his life because he
lost the opportunity to predict an expansion of the universe.
Introduction of the +ve  term [11] is unacceptable because it stands for two unrealistic
features: first, gravity-like non-gravity imaginary attractive force permeating space and
second, creation of matter from nothing.
However, these observations [11] are consistent with our conclusions that: (i) The universe is
not expanding. (ii) The cosmological redshift is caused by not the Doppler effects of receding
motion of the observed stellar light sources but the energy depletion of the spectral light
photon during passage through the real light medium.
5.4 No initial creation of matter in UPT
7
In UPT's non-expanding universe, the total cosmic substance comprising cosminos and
sharmons is eternally conserved and preserved. There is no initial creation of matter from, or
annihilatory dissolution into, "nothing", localized or universal [1, 2, 9]. There is no "nothing
state" or "zero state" of matter, space or universe.
Sec. 7.1.2 of the book describes the evolution of the concept of space from the successive
percepts of "there, here, there" and that of time from those of "then, now, then" arising from
the motions and changes in the surroundings. In the unmanifested universe, there were only 0spin sharmons of the omnipresent sharmon medium. But no motions and/or changes, hence no
"here & there" and no "now & then" i.e. no perceptible space and no perceptible time even if a
sentient being were imagined to be present there; and there were no energies, momenta,
action, or causation.
As the very first step of manifestation, the opposed ½ -spins of the negatrinos and positrinos
composing the 0-spin scalar sharmons became co-directional. This raises the sharmons into
the 1-spin vector state, due to dynamical instabilities in the Cosmos akin to the stresses and
strains in a supersaturated vapour precipitating a phase change. It also marked the beginning
of perceptible space and perceptible time, which under modern Physics and also in some
scriptural philosophies are eternal. This led to the creations of photonic/gravitonic/colouronic
energy quanta  E and momenta  p with associated motions, changes, action and causation.
Thus in UPT, both space and time began, and will end, with the manifested universe. That is
both have a beginning as well as an end, while in modern Physics and in some scriptural
philosophies both have neither a beginning nor an end.
Transformation of the 0-spin sharmons into 1-spin sharmons serves as the "nucleation" for the
manifested universe. It need not be an isotropic universal event and may even be a localized
or regional change spreading outwards to other regions. The manifested universe may
therefore have directional or regional anisotropies or non-uniformities in the distribution of
mass and galaxies and/or in the ages of galaxies. This does not violate the overall Perfect
Cosmological Principle [9], which admits no singular or preferential directions, locations or
epochs. The existence of other universes than this one of our own is not ruled out, however.
The appearance of 1-spin sharmons marked the beginnings of motion, which was followed by
the beginnings of changes. Therefore "motion" is basic even to the "change" and is the
primary cause of the manifestations in the universe. And the spin of cosminos and sharmon is
basic to all motions. But since the +ve and -ve cosminos occur in pairs the over all resultant
spin for the whole universe is zero. That is why there is no rotation, expansion or motion for
the whole universe as a unit.
Thus "action" also is a dynamic evolute of the sharmon. The Planck constant h =  E. t is
related to the sharmon energy quantum  E = 4.66x10-25 erg and its rotation period 1.3435
sec. Here h,  E and  t have the same conceptual status. But since h has already been
independently determined and  E computed without h in sec 3.3,  t is here calculated from
 E and h.
The above "cool" beginning of the manifested universe was followed by the evolutions of
higher and higher energy 1-spin sharmon aggregates or radiation quanta leading to the wide
spread "hot era" which in Big Bang theory is the localized start. The evolution of material
atoms, molecules, particles etc. from the cosminos and sharmons can be worked out on the
lines of Big Bang theory [1]. The UPT’s age of universe may therefore be taken to exceed that
of the oldest star in Big Bang cosmology by the period of "cool" era.
The UPT also postulates that basic to natural rotatory and spin motions of all physical bodies
in the universe from micro particles through atoms, planets and stars to galaxies is the spin ½
of the two most basic elementary cosminos which compose them all. Moreover, the total net
electric and colour charges in the universe add up to zero. And the total cosmic substance is
eternally conserved. But it does not rule out temporal and/or spatial non-uniformities in the
8
manifested universe. That is the distribution of galaxies or mass may be different in different
directions or regions, and galaxies may differ in their ages to some minor extents but not on a
large scale. These conclusions are consistent with actual observations.
6. Cosmic micro wave background in UPT
In 1955, Arno A. Penzias and Robert W. Wilson of the Bell Laboratories established that a
micro wave cosmic radiation at about 7 cm wavelength baths the earth almost uniformly from
all directions. The Big Bang theory explains it as a remnant of the isotropic early era of "hot"
radiation, but does not clarify as to how the "big" explosion could be so symmetrical as to
impart isotropy to this radiation around the earth. In fact, it should have left significant
turbulences and anisotropies, which are not now actually traceable. Moreover, no evidence of
the site of the big explosion is discernible at all. The Steady State theory has no hot era, hence
no explanation of the cosmic background, leave aside its isotropy.
In UPT, however, the existence as well as isotropy of the background cosmic radiation is very
natural expectation because it is a residue of the isotropic evolutionary process during the
manifestation of the universe. But minor directional differences in the cosmic background are
not ruled out which may be discovered later, or in fact are being actually observed.
References
1. G. Gamow, The Creation of Universe, Viking Press, New York (1952); G. Gamow, Nature 162 (1948) 680;
A.Einstein, Preuss. Akad . Wiss. Berlin Sitzber 142 (1917 ); W. De Sitter, Proc. Kon. Ned. Akad. Wet.19 (1917)
1217, 20 (1917) 229; A. Friedmann, Z. Phys. 10 (1922) 377.
2. F. Hoyle, The Nature of the Universe, Harper & Bros, New York, (1950); Mon. Not. R. Astr. Sci. 108 (1948)
372.
3. H. Bondy & T. Gold, Mon. Not. R. Astr. Soc. 108 (1948) 252.
4. R.L. Oldershaw, Nature 346 (1990) 800.
5. H.C. Arp et al, Nature 346 (1990) 807.
6. R.R. Sharma, Unified Physical Theory, COSMO, New Delhi, 1990; Neoclassical Unified Physical Theory of
Every Thing, Author, Panchkula, 2nd ed. Aug.’98; Inter. Symp. "Frontiers of Fundamental Physics", Hyderabad,
30 Dec.’98 to 1 Jan.’99 (Poster presentation).
7. J.V. Narlikar,General Relativity & Cosmology, MacMillan Company of India, Madras, 1978.
8. R.O. Kapp, Towards a Unified Cosmology, Hutchinson, London, 1960.
9. A. Watson , Science 279 (1998 ) 981-983.
10. J. Glanz, Science 278 (1997) 799-800, 279 (1998) 651-652, 1298-1299; S. Perlmutter et al., Nature 391
(1998) 51-54 .
11. V. Sahni & A. Starobinsky, The Case for a Positive Cosmological  -Term, Astro. Phys. 9904398, 28 April
1999.